Thursday, 21, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Gurbhej Singh vs State Of Punjab
2023 Latest Caselaw 12500 P&H

Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 12500 P&H
Judgement Date : 9 August, 2023

Punjab-Haryana High Court
Gurbhej Singh vs State Of Punjab on 9 August, 2023
           CRM-M-32056-2023 (O&M) 2023:PHHC:103343

           223 (2nd case)
              IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

                                                                      CRM-M-32056-2023 (O&M)
                                                                      Date of decision:09.08.2023

           Gurbhej Singh                                                          ....Petitioner
                                                             Versus

           State of Punjab                                                        ....Respondent

           CORAM:                  HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MONGA

           Present:                Mr. Veneet Sharma, Advocate
                                   for the petitioner.

                                   Ms. Guramrit Kaur, DAG, Punjab.
                                               ****

           ARUN MONGA, J. (ORAL)

After being declined bail by the trial Court, petitioner before this Court

seeks his release as undertrial in case bearing FIR No.164 dated 26.07.2022, registered

under Section 21, 23, 29of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985

(for short 'NDPS Act') and sections 42 and 52-A of Prison Act at Police Station,Special

Task Force (STF) District STF Wing, SAS Nagar, (Mohali).

2. Per prosecution version, on the basis of secret information, one polythene

envelope, containing 500 grams Heroin was recovered from the dash-board of a vehicle,

in which the petitioner was travelling as passenger at the time of alleged recovery. Per

report of Chemical Examiner, sample contained Diacetylmorphine.Petitioner was arrested

from the spot on 26.07.2022 and has been in custody ever since.

3. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that petitioner has beenfalsely

implicated in this case. He has clean antecedents and has been implicated in the present

case on account of involvement of his brother, namely, Harbhej Singh. He too is in

custody and allegedly involved in some other case under NDPS Act as well. Petitioner is

stated to be a GranthiPathi (priest) in Sri Harmandir Sahib at Amritsar. He has been

reciting Gurbanisince the year 2013.

3.1 He further submits that nothing is to be recovered from the petitioner and

he is not required for further custodial interrogation. There is no likelihood of petitioner

VANDANA tampering with evidence and/or influencing prosecution witnesses. He further submits 2023.08.10 10:21 I attest to the accuracy and

CRM-M-32056-2023 (O&M) 2023:PHHC:103343

that the provisions of Section 42 of the NDPS Act have not been complied with. Further

contends that per Chemical Examiner's report dated 21.10.2022 (Annexure P-4), it is

stated that the sample contained Diacetylmorphine but the percentage of the said

substance was not given in the said report. He further urges that further incarceration of

petitioner would be violative of his right enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution of

India and bar of Section 37 NDPS Act can be diluted bearing in mind the right to a

speedy trial, given that petitioner is behind bars since 26.07.2022 and trial is likely to take

a long time to conclude.

4. On the other hand, learned State counsel, opposes the bail petition. She

submits that petitioner has committed a serious offence.In case, petitioner is granted

concession of bail, there are chances of his fleeing from justice. She further submits that

recovery of contraband falls within the ambit of commercial quantity and rigors of

Section 37 of the NDPS Act would be attracted in the present case. However, she admits

that there is no other case pending against the petitioner.

5. I have heard rival contentions of learned counsels for the parties and have

gone through the case file.

6. On a Court query, under instructions from SI Harbhej Singh, learned State

counsel submits that challan has already been presented.Charges wereframed on

06.05.2023. There are 18 prosecution witnesses out of them,none hasbeen examined till

date.Investigation is thuscomplete qua petitioner, he is not required for custodial

interrogation.Bail allows an accused to maintain hisfreedom until his guilt or innocence is

determined.Commencement/conclusion of the trial is likely to take quite sometimeas it is

proceeding at a snail pace.Whereas petitioner has beenlanguishing in jail for more than01

year in preventive custody, beingbehind bars since 26.07.2022.

7. Petitioner is being kept in preventive custody merely on anunfounded

suspicion that if he is let out, he may either tamper with evidence and/ orinfluence

witnesses. There is no documentary evidence and it is more in the nature ofFSL report

qua contraband, already filed in the Court below to which accused has noaccess. There is

no probability of tampering with evidence as the same has already beenseized by the VANDANA 2023.08.10 10:21 I attest to the accuracy and

CRM-M-32056-2023 (O&M) 2023:PHHC:103343

investigating agency. As regards witnesses, they are all official andtherefore, they are

unlikely to be influenced, even if there is any such apprehension bythe prosecution.

8. Be that as it may, offence allegedly committed by petitioner is of non-

violent nature and in that sense his release on bail is not a threat to society at large by

committing any violent crime. In any case, allegations against petitioner are matter of

trial.At this stage, there appears to be a reasonable ground that petitioner may not be

guilty of the alleged offence. He is unlikely to commit any offence while on bail.

9. Petitioner is stated to be 26-year old and havinga 3-year old daughter and

wifeto look after. Being a family person with clean antecedents, it is unlikely that he is

flight risk or will flee from the trial proceedings.

10. Considering the overall scenario and without commenting on the merits of

the case, the instant petition is allowed. I am of the view that no useful purpose would be

served to keep the petitioner in further preventive custody.

11. Accordingly, petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his furnishing

bail bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of Ld. trial Court, where his case is being

tried and in case he/she is not available, before learned Duty Judge, as the case may be.

12. In case, petitioner is found to be involved or gets involved in any offence

while on bail, the prosecution shall be at liberty to seek cancellation of his bail in the

instant case.

13. It is made clear that any observations and/or submissions noted hereinabove

shall not have any effect on merits of the case as the same are for the limited purpose of

hearing the instant bail petition alone and learned trial Court shall proceed without being

influenced with this order.

14. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.




                                                                               ( ARUN MONGA )
                                                                                   JUDGE
           09.08.2023
           vandana
                                   Whether speaking/reasoned:                 Yes/No
                                   Whether reportable:                        Yes/No

VANDANA
2023.08.10 10:21
I attest to the accuracy and

 

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : MAIMS

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter